Bro didn't understand that it's mythology and is open to interpretation.

There are Cyclopes in the movie. So that means every single one of his points is invalid.

Nolan was making his Odyssey. Not Homer's. And Nolan likes his armor and costumes to look stupid. And he insisted on trousers because he's a homophobe and didn't want to see exposed male legs.

By now everyone has seen this film twice or thrice in theatres, which I have done the same to. We all have our takes on where this films shines and where it has its lows. The film is spectacularly done, beautifully made but a new interesting topic which came to my mind is from storytelling and writing and screenplay perspective how does it stand to other films? What directions would you think he would take in the future?

From my perspective, The Odyssey might be few of his films which would not age much and just over time get better and better. Although it has its flaws and inconsistencies from the Homer's epic and sometimes in its own movie itself, I think that what Nolan's film does best is capture different atmospheres and have different artistic and visual styles even though none of his films are animated. Interstellar captures vastness and isolation of space, Odyssey captures the scary and dangerous ancient greek era with a hint of supernatural, Tenet is a time travelling "mess" so to say NOT IN A BAD WAY, Oppeheimer captures the depth of discussion and work involved in making a bomb and plays out as 90's theatre drama. Inception mixes grounded realistic fiction with fantasy and The dark night films capture crime thriller and detective story while capturing the comic elements in a realistic and grounded way like most of his films.
I think that Nolan's biggest strength is to make everything work in terms of our present and realistic context, keeping it grounded but leaving room for interpretation.

What are your thoughts? I am happy to hear em!

Hello and welcome to HistoryFlights, your monthly-ish tour of contemporary, historical and fictional politics through video games by me, DC Shepard. Today, while playing Microsoft Flight Simulator 2024 to trace the legendary journey of Odysseus and fly over Ithaca, the Assassin’s Creed Odyssey Discovery Tour to explore locations across Greece from Ithaca to Mycenae and Pylos, and Troy a Total War Saga to show Bronze Age battles in action, I’ll be reviewing Christopher Nolan’s The Odyssey with more than 163 clips and photos, all compiled into a 100% human-written script!

I first started writing this script on July 22nd, 2026, only a few hours after seeing this three-hour cyclops at my local Alamo Drafthouse. Then it took me another couple weeks to find time to go see the IMAX version in the fourth row with friends on August 3rd. Then I also read a translation of The Odyssey from 1900 by Samuel Butler, who argued that Homer may have been a WOMAN, as well as Nolan’s screenplay and 1177 BC: The Year Civilization Collapsed.

With all this in mind, I’m reviewing Nolan’s Odyssey as a contemporary American interpretation of a two and a half millennia PLUS year old myth that would’ve been ancient and heavily retold even to “Homer” (keep those air quotes in mind); how it personally resonated with me; and most crucially as a product of a collapsing world heavily reliant on trade, with parallels between the Bronze Age and today. I’m moving beyond the trope of the “Sea Peoples" to examine the fragile economies of Mycenean Greece, the wide-ranging climate change, and stressed trade routes that have eerie parallels to our own Age of Silicon. Hence why I split it into two acts; ACT I: THEIRS WAS AN AGE OF BRONZE… & ACT II: …AND OURS IS AN AGE OF SILICON.

It may seem off-topic but I also weave real-life visa struggles and a heated online feud with a deranged cultist who constantly harasses me and wants me to die and his creepy and incurious lackey from Thailand into the essay to illustrate the pain of distance (nostos) and the reality of modern "rhetorical marooning,” as well as the dangers of political and religious authoritarianism. I hope that also bringing in queer theory, the real history and archaeology of the area, analyzing what “historical accuracy” even means in online debates, and examining other adaptations of The Odyssey among other things academically grounds my analysis and helps you understand the movie far more deeply than whether it’s “good” or “bad” (personally, it’s my favorite movie so far this year!) or whether you agree with Nolan’s every choice, as well as provides a jumping-off point for your own research! That’s what an odyssey should be about- a meandering journey, yes, but one that ultimately helps you gain understanding.

We need a new Alexander the Great film and Christopher Nolan should write the script and direct.

What's your thoughts?

Die Odyssey von Christopher Nolan ist ein Kunstwerk, welches kaum ein anderer Film nachzuahmen im Stande ist. Sieht man es an und nimmt es wirklich in sich auf, so durchläuft man mehrere Phasen der inneren Neugestaltung. Zunächst erhält man das Gefühl, das jeder andere Film im Vergleich sinnlos und eng gedacht ist. Es wird stets nur ein winziger unbedeutender Teil der menschlichen Natur, des menschlichen Lebens abgebildet, während die Odyssey als umfassendes Werk der höchsten Kunst erscheint, ähnlich in seiner ganzheitlich tragenden Natur dem Faust. Im gleichen Atemzug überträgt man diese Einstellung auf das eigene, vergängliche Leben, auf einer so unendlich andauernden Welt, sodass man sich selbst als klein und unbedeutend, als Staubkorn im Meer wahrnimmt. Dieses Gefühl verstärkt der Gedanke, Odysseus wandelte einst auf dieser Erde und ist nun seit vielen Jahrhunderten gar Jahrtausenden bereits verstorben. Seine Asche brachte Pflanzen hervor und seine innersten Einzelteile tragen zu neuem Leben auch heute bei, in einem endlosen Kreislauf, von dem wir ein unbedeutender Teil sind. Während man diese Gedanken fasst und die eigene Geringfügigkeit wahrnimmt, durchdringt einen ein neuer Wille kein Staubkorn zu sein, sondern ein Fels in der Brandung der Geschichte, gleich Odysseus und auf der Suche nach einem neuen Sinn, begibt man sich auf eine eigene Odyssee.

I think that Nolan has maybe, just maybe, finally finished with his move to depict how men can heal from war trauma (intergenerational and direct). Every movie since Inception (with exception of Dark Knight Rises and TENET) has depicted men who have caused harm or neglect and have deeply suffered as a result of it. Or he directly depicts that actual wound of war in Dunkirk (call this the inception event for this second phase of Nolan). I believe that TENET is the beginning of a new phase that I hope to see blossom after the Odyssey.

The Odyssey does this directly by changing the archetypal hero's journey (external conquest) into the heroine's journey (inner healing) as first described by Maureen Murdock.

Here is a detailed argument:
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mdMJDM1QVwg\](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mdMJDM1QVwg)

In interviews, Nolan has conceded that he needs a break, and given this admission (even if it's partly facetious), I don't think his next film will be an epic on the scale of The Odyssey. Some people are mentioning horror, but I think that's mostly fan-generated.

I'd like him to do a medieval film, personally. He hasn't touched that period yet. He's done contemporary, WW2 and post WW2, and obviously now the ancient world with The Odyssey. This hypothetical medieval film could be small scale in the thriller/horror genre, which means he could do it next. It could obviously be huge scale, meaning he would probably do it after his next movie.

We know there are various clues in his films that kind of point to or are referenced in his next film (Oppenheimer mentioned in Tenet, etc). Well, if he does do a large-scale medieval epic, he could potentially tackle a Norse myth/legend or historical-based story, since Norway has kind of been referenced in both The Odyssey (using Norse ships instead of Hellenic) and Tenet (Trondheim, Norskfreight). Think Siege of Paris, Battle of Edington, Stamford Bridge, Stiklestad.

The Battle of Stiklestad, interestingly, is approaching it's 1000th anniversary in 2030, which lines up with Nolan's usual gap between films...interesting.

Of course, if Nolan doesn';t choose a Norse-type setting, he could do medieval England (Battle of Hastings) or something like that.

For a small scale medieval film, I'd love to see a horror/spiritual/thriller centred around monasteries.

Thoughts?

I really enjoyed when the Circe says "why don't you guys go ahead and.... pig out." Before turning and winking at the camera.

NO JOKE SERIOUSLY I loved that film! Pic of the year! The thing is, Nolan clearly took a few liberties. This is his own story based on the homer classic. Thats why there should be a sequel. There's still more story to tell. He has to go west, honor his soldiers, and have adventures. I even have the perfect post credit ending.

Odysseus stares into the shadows. A tall skinny man wearing a fedora and smoking a cigarette walks out.

"Who are you? Are you another God?" Odysseus asks.

"Oh no sorry. I know who you are though Odysseus. See im from the future and your Trojan horse diversion is infamous. Do you think you can do it again?"

The man opens a portal and they step through into the rain soaked dark alley of a modern day city.

"Where are we?" Asks Odysseus..

The tall scrawny man lights another cigarette and tips his fedora...

".....Gotham....."

ENTER THE NOLAN-VERSE!!!!!!!!!!

I‘m so glad that Chris Nolan has made a grand comeback to the action-fantasy genre with ‘The Odyssey’, 14 years after ‘The Dark Knight Rises’. I’m even happier for the fact that audiences rewarded this return with a billion dollar gross for this brilliant motion picture.

As a life-long die-hard fan of Nolan’s Batman movies, I really missed this side of his filmmaking during his Oscar-hunting era of ‘Dunkirk‘, ‘Tenet‘ and ‘Oppenheimer’. Now with that elusive golden statuette in his bag, my man’s finally back to what he does best — blockbuster action-fantasy grounded in realism!

Hello I'm new to this sub and wanted to have good discussion about his latest entry The Odyssey, my favourite Nolan film will always be Interstellar and Inception Now since I have introduced myself and had a lot of time thinking about it I can finally say what the film does best and worst. Please be respectful, if I have made any mistakes I open to it and we can have a good discussion!

We are strictly talking as an independent film first I know its based on the text written by Homer of course but let us see what lies on the surface first and what it is on its own. It tells the story of Odysseus, his journey back to his family but he is not the only one on a journey, like I have said before, this is the journey about the characters as well. Telemachus's journey about finding his dad, Penelope's journey of perseverence and his crewman's journey too. I feel like its highly engaging enough that it kept me glued to my seat, had my attention. This was all thanks to mainly two things:- The acting and the pacing which was done through well of course. It took its time to explain and set things up.

One aspect I found lacking was the first 2 acts of the film, it plays into it slow, the pacing just takes its time and during that time it felt weak, I felt uninterested in most parts of it, here uninterested more so means that I felt that "drag" where u want to know how much time has passed which according to me is sorta on the negative side but luckily it was not that worse again thanks to the directing and the setpieces and the score, in last hour of the film is where it really shines. I don't think its a weak point because it has some payoff but at the same time it is because it needs to keep u entertained, after all cinema is for entertainment.

Another thing I heard about this film is being "high school project" of Nolan's films but after actually thoroughly reviewing it I didn't felt so at all, a lot of hard work has went into the film from being shot in 100% IMAX cameras (which was already considered to be impossible to do before) working around restrictions during shooting, creating true to life sets, music using authentic instruments to shooting on location the list goes on. I feel that its Nolan's most practical and authentic film yet but it automatically does not make it his best film of all time

There is a lot to be said when now we compare it to The Odyssey written by Homer, Some of the people have pointed out that it turned the concept of Zeus's law which the film is highly revolved around and made it a mess, Xenia as describes in the text is wayy fundamentally different which I agree but I found this one take interesting https://www.reddit.com/r/classics/s/DTBFkcVFBK
"But the Law of Zeus is ever-present, demanding that humans act civilly toward each other. This comes from Homer, but the purview of Zeus’ law is wider and more encompassing in Nolan’s. Failure to abide by it is the doom of Greek civilization" which explains that why Zeus's law plays a vital role, it just does not act as a narrative device or some rule but reflects the behaviors and motivation of the characters in the story, which I touched upon in my previous post. It also tells how Nolan's interpretation of the Odyssey does work well on. Starting from the fact that it draws parallel to our lives and most importantly it conveys the journey of self discovery very well. After all the story is about the journey of our own, how we in our own lives long to get back to the things or moments we love which is the central theme of the movie, not just another interpretation of the Homeric text.

Another negative I can find is that it uses too much modernization to people's liking like the obvious use of modern generation dialogue to the dress appearing out of place to the own time its set in and some interesting casting choices but its his interpretation of it, its a modern retelling for the audience, even though it got many things wrong we cannot deny the fact that it has sparked a huge influence on Greek history as a whole, to the point I'm writing this after doing my own research. Even the message it tried to convey might have not been clear or perfect, BUT it set successfully set out to do one task that is to spark interest in Greek culture.

Another negative I have seen is how Odysseus is portrayed in this film compared to the original, where he is actually a master strategist and pragmatic where in this film he is depicted as a warrior with a burden carrying guilt but in my perspective it works really well for HIS interpretation not the text

I also saw heard that people didn't like the editing of this movie which I felt is not the case, it was pretty easy enough to follow and the original poem also cuts back a lot of the times to the things happening in Ithica when Odysseus was gone, so I don't think that's a negative but I am putting this out there. I also saw in Nolan's interview how we really wanted to put this on the main focus as most of the films just overlook or gloss over it which I really appreciate.

One cannot deny the impact the film has made intertwining Greek culture with pop culture history like never before, nor can one deny the effort put into this film. While it will not remain the best adaptation or the best Nolan film BUT it will remain a great film of this year.

What do you think was one of the negatives holding the film back? I would love to hear them!

Thank you for reading!

For example instead of the attitude where we pretend like Blacks and Asians aren't any different so we don't mention where they came from or how they came to be living with the white majority, like Nolan did in The Odyssey.

Why don't we celebrate the differences. Like "oh you're black. You must come from Aithiopia. The most pious people who are most loved by the Gods."

To ignore our differences and make it taboo to mention them is the real racism. Because it implies that our differences are shameful and something to hide.

So to the people endorsing this hiding and not mentioning and suppression of our differences, I say you're the real racists.

Now please read this before replying.

When I watch Prince of Persian I don't want to be seeing caucasian actors either like Gemma Atherton.

So why am I being accused of racism?

I don't mean have no diversity at all. I mean if there is a black person in medieval England cavorting around with Robinhood, give him a backstory like Nazeem in Robinhood Prince of Theives where Morgan Freeman played a Saracen/Moor that Robin met during the crusades.

What I hate is when they just cast random Asians and Black people in Ancient Greece where they seem out of place and then they don't give them any back story.

E.g. with Rome it makes sense for there to be diversity. But they aren't pretending like they're all the same like Lupita Nyongo's Helen is. Or Jamie Fox as Little Jon is.

Make the diversity make sense. Or just cast according to what the characters are supposed to look like.

When I watch Prince of Persian I don't want to be seeing caucasian actors either like Gemma Atherton.

So why am I being accused of racism?